Preview
Electronically Filed
1 Kevin Faulk, SBN 224711 3/25/2021 6:06 PM
Law Offices of Kevin Faulk Superior Court of California
2 530 Lawrence Expy., #361 County of Stanislaus
Sunnyvale, CA 94085
3 Telephone: (408) 599-3277 Clerk of the Court
Facsimile: (408) 800-4046 By: Sonia Krohn, Deputy
4
5
Attorney for Jenifer Harding, Plaintiff
$435 PAID
6
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
FOR THE COUNTY OF STANISLAUS
9
Jenifer Harding, ) Case No.: CV-21-001615
10
)
) COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
Plaintiff, ) RELIEF, RESTITUTION AND
11
) DAMAGES:
vs. )
12
) 1- California Civil Code § 1750 et seq.
Central Valley Motors, Inc. and Does One ) 2- California Business & Professions
13
through Twenty, ) Code § 17200
14
)
)
Defendants. )
15
) DEMAND FOR JURY
16
)
)
17
)
) UNLIMITED CIVIL CASE
18
)
19
Plaintiff Jenifer Harding hereby alleges as follows:
20
PARTIES TO THE ACTION
21
22 1. Plaintiff, Jenifer Harding (“Plaintiff”), is an individual, residing at all
23 relevant times in the city of Auburn, county of Placer, state of California.
24 2. Defendant, Central Valley Motors, Inc. (“Dealer”), is a corporation and at
25 all relevant times was doing business in the city of Modesto, county of San Joaquin , state
26
of California.
27
3. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or
otherwise, of Defendants, Does One through Twenty, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff,
28
who therefore sues these Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave to
Complaint - 1
Freeland, John D
Dept. 23
1
amend this complaint to set forth their true names and capacities when they have been
2 ascertained. Further, Plaintiff is informed, believes, and alleges that each Defendant
3 designated here as a “Doe” is responsible in some manner for the events and happenings
4 referred to here, and caused injury and damage to Plaintiff as alleged here.
5 4. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and alleges that at all times mentioned here,
6 Defendants, and each of them, were the agents, servants, and/or employees of each of
7 their Co-Defendants. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and alleges that in doing the things
8 hereinafter, alleged Defendants, and each of them, were acting in the course and scope of
9 their employment as such agents, servants, and/or employees, and with the permission,
10 consent, knowledge, and/or ratification of their Co-Defendants, principals, and/or
11 employers.
12 FACTS RELEVANT TO ALL CLAIMS
13 5. On December 12, 2020, Plaintiff purchased a 2019 Mazda CX-9 from
14 Dealer.
15 6. At the time of sale, Dealer indicated that the vehicle had gone through an
16 extensive presale inspection, that it was a “certified pre-owned vehicle,” and that it was
17 covered by manufacturer warranty. Dealer provided a Carfax which indicated that the
18 vehicle had no accident history. Dealer did not disclose that the vehicle had any accident
19 history.
20 7. Plaintiff has since taken the vehicle in to get a headlight repaired. She was
21 told that the vehicle was damaged, and that the headlight could not be mounted correctly
22 as a result of this damage. She was denied warranty coverage for this repair.
23 8. Plaintiff had the vehicle inspected by a body shop. The body shop could not
24 even give her an estimate for repair, as that would have required tearing the vehicle
25 down.
26 9. Dealer has an obligation to disclose all material facts to the consumer.
27 Vehicle Code § 11705(a)(14).
28 10. The Vehicle Code provides it is a violation of the Consumers Legal
Remedies Act to sell a vehicle as “certified” that had sustained frame damage or damage
Complaint - 2
1
that substantially impairs the use or safety of the vehicle. Vehicle Code §§ 11713.18(a)
2 (4), (5).
3 11. This cause of action arises out of Defendants’ misrepresentations, breach of
4 warranty, and violations of law hereinafter alleged. The amount in controversy exceeds
5 $25,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs, for which Plaintiff seeks judgment against
6 Defendants, together with equitable relief. In addition, Plaintiff seeks damages from
7 Defendants for incidental, consequential, exemplary, and actual damages, including
8 interest, costs, and actual attorney fees.
9
10
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act
11
12 12. Plaintiff incorporates every paragraph above by this reference.
13 13. The Vehicle is a “good” as defined by California Civil Code § 1761(a).
14 14. Defendants are “persons” as defined by California Civil Code § 1761(c).
15 15. Plaintiff is a “consumer” as defined by California Civil Code § 1761(d).
16 16. The sale of the vehicle and related representations constitute a “transaction”
17 as defined by California Civil Code § 1761(e).
18 17. By virtue of the misrepresentations and omissions made during the course
19 of the sale, including that Dealer had inspected the vehicle, that it had warranty
20 coverage, and that it had no accident history, Defendants have engaged, or attempted to
21 engage, in unlawful methods, acts, or practices during the relevant time period herein
22 pursuant to CLRA, including, but not limited to, California Civil Code § 1770(a):
23
(2) Misrepresenting the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods
24
or services.
25
(5) Representing that goods or services have sponsorship, approval,
26 characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities which they do not
27 have or that a person has a sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or
connection which he or she does not have.
28
(9) Advertising goods or services with intent not to sell them as advertised.
Complaint - 3
1
2
(16) Representing that the subject of a transaction has been supplied in
3 accordance with a previous representation when it has not.
4
18. Plaintiff has not complied with the notice provisions of Civil Code § 1782,
5
and therefore does not seek damages on this claim at the time this Complaint is filed.
6
However, Plaintiff does seek restitution pursuant to Civil Code § 1780(a)(3).
7
19. Plaintiff will notify Defendants of the particular alleged violations of §
8
1770 and demand that they correct, repair, replace, or otherwise rectify the goods or
9
services alleged to be in violation of § 1770. The notice will be given in writing and will
10
be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the place where the transaction
11
occurred or to the Defendant’s principal place of business within California. By
12
operation of law and without leave of Court, this Complaint will be amended to state a
13
claim for damages pursuant to Civil Code § 1782(d) upon the expiration of thirty days
14
after the notice is given.
15
20. Civil Code § 1780(a)(2) of the CLRA provides that a consumer is entitled
16
to an injunction prohibiting acts or practices which violate the CLRA. Plaintiff seeks an
17
order enjoining Dealer from the acts, methods, and practices set forth in this Complaint.
18
21. Under California Civil Code §1780(e), Plaintiff may also recover attorney
19
fees and costs according to proof at time of trial.
20
22. Defendants have violated California Civil Code § 1750 et seq. by failing to
21
make correction, and, therefore, are subject to punitive damages pursuant to California
22
Civil Code § 1780(a)(4).
23
23. As a direct result of Defendants’ acts and omissions, Plaintiff has suffered
24
damages. Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment in her favor and relief as set forth
25
at the close of this complaint.
26
27 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of Business & Professions Code § 17200
28
24. Plaintiff incorporates every paragraph above this by reference.
Complaint - 4
1
25. Dealer committed acts of unfair competition, as defined by Business and
2
Professions Code §17200, et seq. As set forth more fully in the paragraphs above, Dealer
3
engaged in a course of conduct of systematically violating the consumer laws in this
4
State prohibiting the commitment of deceptive practices, including the prohibitions
5
contained in the Consumers Legal Remedies.
6
26. Dealer violated the UCL by falsely stating that the vehicle was covered by
7
warranty, that the vehicle had been thoroughly inspected, and omitting the accident
8
history of the vehicle.
9
27. The harm to Plaintiff outweighs the utility of Dealer’s policies and
10
11
practices particularly considering the available alternatives, and Dealer’s policies and
12
practices are immoral, unscrupulous, unethical and against public policy. Dealer’s
13 policies and practices consequently constitute an “unfair” business act or practice within
14 the meaning of Business and Professions Code § 17200.
15 28. Dealer’s deceptive policies and practices as set forth above also are likely
16 to and/or have deceived Plaintiff. Thus, Dealer has also engaged in “fraudulent”
17 business practices.
18 29. Dealer has engaged in, and continues to engage in, the same form of
19 deceptive acts and practices.
20
30. Dealer’s unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business practices present a
21
continuing threat to Plaintiff and others in that Dealer will continue utilizing similar
22
policies and practices.
23
31. Business and Professions Code §17203 provides that Plaintiff is entitled to
24
an order enjoining Dealer from engaging in acts or practices that violate Business and
25
Professions Code § 17200, as well as providing for equitable monetary relief so as to
26
preclude the retention of all ill-gotten monies by Dealer or so as to restore any monies
27
wrongfully obtained by Dealer to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has lost money and suffered injury
28
in fact as a result of Dealer’s illegal conduct. Plaintiff seeks such equitable monetary
Complaint - 5
1
relief, and an order enjoining Dealer from engaging in the acts and practices set forth in
2 this Complaint, imposing an asset freeze or constructive trust over such monies as the
3 Court deems appropriate, as well as compelling a corrective informational campaign to
4 correct the misperceptions in the marketplace created by such conduct. Plaintiff further
5 seeks attorney fees and costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5.
6 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against all Defendants as follows:
7 1. For Plaintiff’s damages in the amount of at least $5,000, except that no
8
damages are sought on Plaintiff’s claim pursuant to the Consumer Legal Remedies Act
9
until 30 days after the notice required by Civil Code § 1782(a) is given;
10
2. For incidental and consequential damages in the amount of $2,000.00,
11
except that no damages are sought on Plaintiff’s claim pursuant to the Consumer Legal
12
Remedies Act until 30 days after the notice required by Civil Code § 1782(a) is given;
13
3. Upon the expiration of 30 days after the notice required by Civil Code §
14
1782(a) is given, for punitive damages pursuant to Civil Code § 1780(a)(4);
15
4. For injunctive relief permitted under Civil Code § 1780 and Bus. & Prof.
16
Code § 17203 ordering Defendant to desist from selling certified preowned vehicles
17
without disclosing prior collision damage;
18
19
5. For pre-judgment interest at the legal rate;
20 6. For reasonable attorney fees and costs of suit as permitted by law,
21 including, but not limited to, Civil Code § 1780(e) and Code of Civil Procedure §
22 1021.5; and
23 7. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper under
24 the circumstances.
25 Dated: March 25, 2021
26 By:
Kevin Faulk, Attorney for Plaintiff
27
28
Complaint - 6
Preview
Electronically Filed 1 Kevin Faulk, SBN 224711 3/25/2021 6:06 PM Law Offices of Kevin Faulk Superior Court of California 2 530 Lawrence Expy., #361 County of Stanislaus Sunnyvale, CA 94085 3 Telephone: (408) 599-3277 Clerk of the Court Facsimile: (408) 800-4046 By: Sonia Krohn, Deputy 4 5 Attorney for Jenifer Harding, Plaintiff $435 PAID 6 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 FOR THE COUNTY OF STANISLAUS 9 Jenifer Harding, ) Case No.: CV-21-001615 10 ) ) COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE Plaintiff, ) RELIEF, RESTITUTION AND 11 ) DAMAGES: vs. ) 12 ) 1- California Civil Code § 1750 et seq. Central Valley Motors, Inc. and Does One ) 2- California Business & Professions 13 through Twenty, ) Code § 17200 14 ) ) Defendants. ) 15 ) DEMAND FOR JURY 16 ) ) 17 ) ) UNLIMITED CIVIL CASE 18 ) 19 Plaintiff Jenifer Harding hereby alleges as follows: 20 PARTIES TO THE ACTION 21 22 1. Plaintiff, Jenifer Harding (“Plaintiff”), is an individual, residing at all 23 relevant times in the city of Auburn, county of Placer, state of California. 24 2. Defendant, Central Valley Motors, Inc. (“Dealer”), is a corporation and at 25 all relevant times was doing business in the city of Modesto, county of San Joaquin , state 26 of California. 27 3. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, of Defendants, Does One through Twenty, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff, 28 who therefore sues these Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave to Complaint - 1 Freeland, John D Dept. 23 1 amend this complaint to set forth their true names and capacities when they have been 2 ascertained. Further, Plaintiff is informed, believes, and alleges that each Defendant 3 designated here as a “Doe” is responsible in some manner for the events and happenings 4 referred to here, and caused injury and damage to Plaintiff as alleged here. 5 4. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and alleges that at all times mentioned here, 6 Defendants, and each of them, were the agents, servants, and/or employees of each of 7 their Co-Defendants. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and alleges that in doing the things 8 hereinafter, alleged Defendants, and each of them, were acting in the course and scope of 9 their employment as such agents, servants, and/or employees, and with the permission, 10 consent, knowledge, and/or ratification of their Co-Defendants, principals, and/or 11 employers. 12 FACTS RELEVANT TO ALL CLAIMS 13 5. On December 12, 2020, Plaintiff purchased a 2019 Mazda CX-9 from 14 Dealer. 15 6. At the time of sale, Dealer indicated that the vehicle had gone through an 16 extensive presale inspection, that it was a “certified pre-owned vehicle,” and that it was 17 covered by manufacturer warranty. Dealer provided a Carfax which indicated that the 18 vehicle had no accident history. Dealer did not disclose that the vehicle had any accident 19 history. 20 7. Plaintiff has since taken the vehicle in to get a headlight repaired. She was 21 told that the vehicle was damaged, and that the headlight could not be mounted correctly 22 as a result of this damage. She was denied warranty coverage for this repair. 23 8. Plaintiff had the vehicle inspected by a body shop. The body shop could not 24 even give her an estimate for repair, as that would have required tearing the vehicle 25 down. 26 9. Dealer has an obligation to disclose all material facts to the consumer. 27 Vehicle Code § 11705(a)(14). 28 10. The Vehicle Code provides it is a violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act to sell a vehicle as “certified” that had sustained frame damage or damage Complaint - 2 1 that substantially impairs the use or safety of the vehicle. Vehicle Code §§ 11713.18(a) 2 (4), (5). 3 11. This cause of action arises out of Defendants’ misrepresentations, breach of 4 warranty, and violations of law hereinafter alleged. The amount in controversy exceeds 5 $25,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs, for which Plaintiff seeks judgment against 6 Defendants, together with equitable relief. In addition, Plaintiff seeks damages from 7 Defendants for incidental, consequential, exemplary, and actual damages, including 8 interest, costs, and actual attorney fees. 9 10 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act 11 12 12. Plaintiff incorporates every paragraph above by this reference. 13 13. The Vehicle is a “good” as defined by California Civil Code § 1761(a). 14 14. Defendants are “persons” as defined by California Civil Code § 1761(c). 15 15. Plaintiff is a “consumer” as defined by California Civil Code § 1761(d). 16 16. The sale of the vehicle and related representations constitute a “transaction” 17 as defined by California Civil Code § 1761(e). 18 17. By virtue of the misrepresentations and omissions made during the course 19 of the sale, including that Dealer had inspected the vehicle, that it had warranty 20 coverage, and that it had no accident history, Defendants have engaged, or attempted to 21 engage, in unlawful methods, acts, or practices during the relevant time period herein 22 pursuant to CLRA, including, but not limited to, California Civil Code § 1770(a): 23 (2) Misrepresenting the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods 24 or services. 25 (5) Representing that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, 26 characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities which they do not 27 have or that a person has a sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or connection which he or she does not have. 28 (9) Advertising goods or services with intent not to sell them as advertised. Complaint - 3 1 2 (16) Representing that the subject of a transaction has been supplied in 3 accordance with a previous representation when it has not. 4 18. Plaintiff has not complied with the notice provisions of Civil Code § 1782, 5 and therefore does not seek damages on this claim at the time this Complaint is filed. 6 However, Plaintiff does seek restitution pursuant to Civil Code § 1780(a)(3). 7 19. Plaintiff will notify Defendants of the particular alleged violations of § 8 1770 and demand that they correct, repair, replace, or otherwise rectify the goods or 9 services alleged to be in violation of § 1770. The notice will be given in writing and will 10 be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the place where the transaction 11 occurred or to the Defendant’s principal place of business within California. By 12 operation of law and without leave of Court, this Complaint will be amended to state a 13 claim for damages pursuant to Civil Code § 1782(d) upon the expiration of thirty days 14 after the notice is given. 15 20. Civil Code § 1780(a)(2) of the CLRA provides that a consumer is entitled 16 to an injunction prohibiting acts or practices which violate the CLRA. Plaintiff seeks an 17 order enjoining Dealer from the acts, methods, and practices set forth in this Complaint. 18 21. Under California Civil Code §1780(e), Plaintiff may also recover attorney 19 fees and costs according to proof at time of trial. 20 22. Defendants have violated California Civil Code § 1750 et seq. by failing to 21 make correction, and, therefore, are subject to punitive damages pursuant to California 22 Civil Code § 1780(a)(4). 23 23. As a direct result of Defendants’ acts and omissions, Plaintiff has suffered 24 damages. Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment in her favor and relief as set forth 25 at the close of this complaint. 26 27 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of Business & Professions Code § 17200 28 24. Plaintiff incorporates every paragraph above this by reference. Complaint - 4 1 25. Dealer committed acts of unfair competition, as defined by Business and 2 Professions Code §17200, et seq. As set forth more fully in the paragraphs above, Dealer 3 engaged in a course of conduct of systematically violating the consumer laws in this 4 State prohibiting the commitment of deceptive practices, including the prohibitions 5 contained in the Consumers Legal Remedies. 6 26. Dealer violated the UCL by falsely stating that the vehicle was covered by 7 warranty, that the vehicle had been thoroughly inspected, and omitting the accident 8 history of the vehicle. 9 27. The harm to Plaintiff outweighs the utility of Dealer’s policies and 10 11 practices particularly considering the available alternatives, and Dealer’s policies and 12 practices are immoral, unscrupulous, unethical and against public policy. Dealer’s 13 policies and practices consequently constitute an “unfair” business act or practice within 14 the meaning of Business and Professions Code § 17200. 15 28. Dealer’s deceptive policies and practices as set forth above also are likely 16 to and/or have deceived Plaintiff. Thus, Dealer has also engaged in “fraudulent” 17 business practices. 18 29. Dealer has engaged in, and continues to engage in, the same form of 19 deceptive acts and practices. 20 30. Dealer’s unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business practices present a 21 continuing threat to Plaintiff and others in that Dealer will continue utilizing similar 22 policies and practices. 23 31. Business and Professions Code §17203 provides that Plaintiff is entitled to 24 an order enjoining Dealer from engaging in acts or practices that violate Business and 25 Professions Code § 17200, as well as providing for equitable monetary relief so as to 26 preclude the retention of all ill-gotten monies by Dealer or so as to restore any monies 27 wrongfully obtained by Dealer to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has lost money and suffered injury 28 in fact as a result of Dealer’s illegal conduct. Plaintiff seeks such equitable monetary Complaint - 5 1 relief, and an order enjoining Dealer from engaging in the acts and practices set forth in 2 this Complaint, imposing an asset freeze or constructive trust over such monies as the 3 Court deems appropriate, as well as compelling a corrective informational campaign to 4 correct the misperceptions in the marketplace created by such conduct. Plaintiff further 5 seeks attorney fees and costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5. 6 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against all Defendants as follows: 7 1. For Plaintiff’s damages in the amount of at least $5,000, except that no 8 damages are sought on Plaintiff’s claim pursuant to the Consumer Legal Remedies Act 9 until 30 days after the notice required by Civil Code § 1782(a) is given; 10 2. For incidental and consequential damages in the amount of $2,000.00, 11 except that no damages are sought on Plaintiff’s claim pursuant to the Consumer Legal 12 Remedies Act until 30 days after the notice required by Civil Code § 1782(a) is given; 13 3. Upon the expiration of 30 days after the notice required by Civil Code § 14 1782(a) is given, for punitive damages pursuant to Civil Code § 1780(a)(4); 15 4. For injunctive relief permitted under Civil Code § 1780 and Bus. & Prof. 16 Code § 17203 ordering Defendant to desist from selling certified preowned vehicles 17 without disclosing prior collision damage; 18 19 5. For pre-judgment interest at the legal rate; 20 6. For reasonable attorney fees and costs of suit as permitted by law, 21 including, but not limited to, Civil Code § 1780(e) and Code of Civil Procedure § 22 1021.5; and 23 7. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper under 24 the circumstances. 25 Dated: March 25, 2021 26 By: Kevin Faulk, Attorney for Plaintiff 27 28 Complaint - 6